that pneumatic tire that might ultimately convince them to recognize that it does exist.

My sense is that there is going to need to be very detailed planning on the part of all of these technologies and the scientists involved in them to demonstrate how, as you go down that line month by month, year by year, that the milestones that you can accomplish are measurable and, therefore, provide that kind of visual fact of success, so that this country, as it is locked in a very difficult struggle with finances, can turn around and explain to the taxpayers that that money is not being thrown down a rat hole, but is rather developing good and very progressive technology that in the future is not only going to help the taxpayers, but it's going to help the environment as well.

Those are the things that I offer you as encouragement. I am very grateful for your coming and testifying. You are all in the same boat. I encourage you to work together to foster a little corner of alternative fusion potential within the larger fusion environment at DOE, and, hopefully, with that cooperation and that continued effort, we can realize the funding that will finally put you on the map in the bureaucracy.

Thank you once again and we look forward to hearing from you in the future of your successes.

This meeting is now adjourned.

[Whereupon, at 5:50 p.m., the Subcommittee adjourned, subject to the call of the Chair.]

On May 5, 1993, Dr. N. Anne Davies, Associate Director of the Office of Fusion Energy, Office of Energy Research, testified before your subcommittee regarding the Fiscal Year 1994 budget request for the Fusion Energy program.

Following the hearing, you submitted eight written questions to supplement the record. Enclosed are the answers to those questions. Additional questions submitted by Congressman Fawell are in the clearing process and will be forwarded to you as expeditiously as possible.

If we can be of further assistance to you or your staff, please contact our Congressional Hearing Coordinator, Barbara Campbell, on (202) 586-8238.

Question 1:

QUESTIONS FROM REPRESENTATIVE LLOYD

Billions of dollars and 30 years have been invested in the development of the magnetic fusion concept. In spite of the progress made, this technology has not yet proved that it can become an economical, reliable, and continuous source of electricity. Why then is it the only fusion option being pursued by the Department?

The Department remains open to considering any ideas on fusion
energy. The principles of physics allow only a few approaches to
the confinement of very hot gas necessary to produce a fusion
reaction. Over the years, various ideas have been proposed to
the Department. All proposals are reviewed for technical merit
and an attempt is made to conduct research in proportion to that
merit. This process has resulted in the present emphasis on the
toroidal magnetic approach that is judged, worldwide, to have the
highest potential to lead to an economical, reliable, and
continuous source of electricity. A substantial effort is also
supported within the Department on inertial confinement fusion,
in part because of its potential to produce electricity but
primarily because of its contributions to weapons research and
development. In addition, a solicitation of proposals for new
magnetic confinement concepts was recently concluded. The
selection process resulted in the choice of three research
proposals to receive a total funding of $1.2 million per year for
three years. These three experiments will explore concepts quite

QUESTIONS FROM REPRESENTATIVE LLOYD

Question 2: Why must the Tokamak Physics Experiment proceed now? Why can't the initiation of this facility be deferred, at least until after the deuterium-tritium operations at the Tokamak Fusion Test Reactor? The time dependency for a Fiscal Year 1994 start_does not seem to be related to the International Thermonuclear Test Reactor Program because the International Thermonuclear Test Reactor design is obviously ahead (schedule-wise) of the period when Tokamak Physics Experiment could be built and operated and, as such, influence the design of the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor. Furthermore, it appears that something might be learned from the deuterium-tritium operations at Tokamak Fusion Test Reactor which could influence some of the design features for the Tokamak Physics Experiment.

By proceeding now with the detailed design for the Tokamak
Physics Experiment, the machine could be operating by around the
year 2000. It would provide at least 5 years of experimental
results before the International Thermonuclear Experimental
Reactor could come into operation. It was never intended for the
Tokamak Physics Experiment to influence the design of the
International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor, which is based
on conservative extrapolations from the present experimental data
base. It could, however, substantially influence the operating
techniques for both the basic and enhanced performance testing
phases of the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor.
Of even greater importance is the need to have a vigorous
domestic fusion program in order for us to be a credible partner
in the design and construction of the International Thermonuclear
Experimental Reactor, and for us to take full advantage of the
information gained in operating the International Thermonuclear
Experimental Reactor. In addition, by starting the Tokamak